Decision-making capacity and alcohol abuse: clinical and ethical considerations in personal care choices

Shades of grey: choice, control and capacity in alcohol-related brain damage

Liaison psychiatrists have identified that conducting capacity assessments in general hospital patients with alcohol-related brain damage (ARBD) can be challenging. This educational article uses the fictitious case of a man with ARBD, alcohol dependence and significant self-neglect, focusing on assessment of his capacity to decide about moving into a care home on discharge. We provide an overview of clinical, legal and ethical literature relevant to decision-making and capacity assessment in individuals with ARBD, with the aim of guiding clinicians approaching complex capacity assessments.

Capable of more: some underemphasized aspects of capacity assessment

BACKGROUND

The 4-abilities model of decision-making capacity is vulnerable to constricted application and teaching.

OBJECTIVE

The authors attempt to assert the fundamentally clinical nature of capacity evaluations, while acknowledging that the concept of decision-making capacity must be legally grounded.

METHODS

Relevant aspects of clinical care are examined and emphasized as they apply to the evaluation of capacity for medical decision making.

RESULTS

Accessing patients' maximal abilities, attending to noncognitive aspects of choice, and identifying diagnostic explanations for patients' difficulties are important components of these assessments.

DISCUSSION

The evaluation of medical decision-making capacity is not a purely forensic task; it is enhanced by an approach that bridges the clinical-forensic divide.

A review of the concepts, terminologies and dilemmas in the assessment of decisional capacity: a focus on alcoholism

OBJECTIVE

The formal assessment of a person's capacity for making reasoned decisions is an infrequent and usually unappealing clinical task. The purpose of this paper is to dissect the task, consider the component parts, clarify those aspects that can be problematic and highlight those that remain so.

METHOD

The paper reviews the concepts, terminologies and dilemmas around alcoholism, insight, lack of insight, denial, judgement, will, decisional capacity and competence.

CONCLUSION

Assessments of patients suffering from alcoholism (or any other dyscontrol problem such as deliberate self-harm, problem gambling or eating disorders) are likely to evoke unease because of the interweaving of potentially disputable phenomenological, clinical, ethical, semantic and legal aspects. Familiarity with the concepts and terms around decisional capacity helps to orientate clinicians in their work. There remain some particular conceptual issues that are in need of further scholarly attention.

Mental capacity and consent to treatment in psychiatric patients: the state of the research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The past three decades have seen the emergence of the field of decision-making capacity research. The growth has been such that there are several reviews covering a variety of subtopics within the field. The goal is to briefly summarize the state of research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most studies in this field use the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tools for the decisional capacity assessment. Studies in psychiatric patients indicate incapacity is common (20-30%), but the majority are capable of making treatment decisions. Positive symptoms (hallucinations, delusions); negative symptoms (unusual thought content, conceptual disorganization); severity of symptoms; involuntary admission; lack of insight and treatment refusal were the stronger predictors for incapacity in acute and cognitive dysfunction in chronic patients.

SUMMARY

Mental capacity has complex relationships with psychopathological variables, and these relationships are different according to diagnostic group. More research is needed to determine the clinical parameters related to the lack of capacity to make treatment decisions in psychiatric patients.

Older adults' inpatient and emergency department utilization for ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions: relationship with alcohol consumption

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the relationship between drinking that exceeds guideline-recommended limits and acute-care utilization for ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs) by older Medicare beneficiaries.

METHOD

This secondary data analysis used the 2001-2006 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (unweighted n = 5,570 community dwelling, past-year drinkers, 65 years and older). Self-reported alcohol consumption (categorized as within guidelines, exceeding monthly but not daily limits, or heavy episodic) and covariates were used to predict ACSC hospitalization, emergency department visit not resulting in admission, and emergency department visit that did result in admission.

RESULTS

Heavy episodic drinking was significantly associated with higher likelihood of an ACSC emergency department visit not resulting in admission (adjusted odds ratio = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.11-3.30; p < .05). Drinking pattern was not significant for other ACSC measures.

DISCUSSION

Results partially support the hypothesis that excessive drinking may be related to ACSC acute-care utilization among older adults, suggesting increased risk of lower quality outpatient care.

The issue of consent in research that administers drugs of addiction to addicted persons

In addiction, impaired control over drug use raises questions about the capacity of addicted persons to consent to participate in research studies in which they are given their drug of addiction. We review the case for doing such research, and the arguments that addiction does, and does not, prevent addicted persons from consenting to such research. We argue for a more nuanced view that acknowledges that while in some situations addiction impairs decision-making capacity, it does not eliminate such capacity. We conclude with some suggestions for recruiting addicted subjects and designing experiments in ways to obtain free and informed consent.

Informed consent to opioid agonist maintenance treatment: recommended ethical guidelines

BACKGROUND

Some bioethicists have questioned whether opioid addicted individuals are able to provide free and informed consent to opioid agonist maintenance treatment. Conflicting motives for providing such treatment (e.g. improving the personal health of addicts and protecting public health and order) can also influence what individuals are required to consent to, and how that consent is obtained. We discuss both issues and attempt to specify the conditions for obtaining informed consent to agonist maintenance treatment for opioid addiction.

METHODS

We briefly review the neuroscientific literature on the effects of addiction on the autonomy and decision-making capacity of opioid dependent individuals, and ascertain how informed consent to the treatment of opioid addiction should be obtained. We also provide an ethical analysis of the competing social and medical forces that influence the consent process and make some recommendations on how to ensure that individuals enter maintenance treatment that is provided in an effective and ethical way.

RESULTS

Our analysis shows that whilst the autonomy of opioid dependent individuals is impaired by their addiction, they do retain the ability to consent to treatment provided they are not in acute withdrawal or intoxication. These symptoms should have abated, either by supervised withdrawal or stabilisation on agonist maintenance, before they are asked to consent to a detailed treatment contract. Once stabilised, individuals should be provided with detailed information about the risks and benefits of all treatments, and restrictions and regulations under which they are provided.

CONCLUSION

Informed consent is an important part of the treatment process that should be obtained in ways that increase the autonomy and decision-making capacity in opioid addicts.

Evaluation of Competency: Ethical Considerations for Neuropsychologists

The assessment of decision-making capacity is an essential element of competency determinations. As experts in the assessment of human cognitive abilities, neuropsychologists may be the best adjudicators of competency. However, to maximize the contribution of neuropsychology to the courts in the determination of competency, clinicians must be aware of the professional controversies and ethical challenges inherent in the assessment of decision-making capacity and the determination of competence. Professional controversies include the lack of established methodological and procedural guidelines for capacity evaluations and the application of variable criteria to establish impairment. Ethical challenges include balancing the need to respect the individual's freedom of choice and self-determination with the need to promote the individual's safety; attaining professional competence; and selecting, using, and interpreting assessment methods appropriately. The purpose of this article is to examine these issues in the context of neuropsychological practice.

Decisional capacity in mental illness and substance use disorders: empirical database and policy implications

Debates on decisional capacity in people with mental illnesses or substance use disorders have tended to be heated. Yet, they are often based not on empirical data but on personal opinions and experiences. The empirical database in this area is quite limited, but has been growing in recent years. The following discussion focuses on relevant clinical investigations. We consider variations across and within different diagnoses, barriers to decision-making, methods for assessing capacity-interview versus instruments, choosing from among different capacity instruments, decisional capacity-is it a state or a trait?, triggers for assessment of decisional capacity, methods for enhancing capacity, and decisional capacity in people with substance use disorders. Finally, we discuss some relevant health policy recommendations.